Two big things to look at here though.
1. Having even the perception that someone within the NFL (Players, coaches, refs, etc) gambling on the games would be devastating to the NFL.
Here is a quote:
In a letter to Ridley notifying him of his suspension, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell wrote, "Your actions put the integrity of the game at risk, threatened to damage public confidence in professional football, and potentially undermined the reputations of your fellow players throughout the NFL.
"For decades, gambling on NFL games has been considered among the most significant violations of league policy warranting the most substantial sanction. In your case, I acknowledge and commend you for your promptly reporting for an interview, and for admitting your actions."
You have to "drop the hammer" per se in this situation.
2. Gambling is a policy under the CBA (
https://nflcommunications.com/Documents/2018 Policies/2018 Gambling Policy - FINAL.pdf)... it's not subjective like Personal Conduct. It wasn't argued and reviewed by an independent arbiter. The Desean Watson case was and under the new rules, the discipline was taken OUT OF THE NFL's hand. Also, the NFL only brought forward 5 women (4 testified) because the NFL's investigation only found those 5 of the TWENTY FOUR (not thirty) accusations to be "credible".
I guess I look at this differently... we all agree that the NFL over-punished players and it wasn't fair. So the players negotiated and changed the way it was done and they get someone else to give a 'fair' ruling and people look to the unfair rulings as precedent. THAT'S NONSENSE!